[HN Gopher] A smartphone with a fluid lens
___________________________________________________________________
A smartphone with a fluid lens
Author : helsinkiandrew
Score : 45 points
Date : 2021-04-17 07:54 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
| miohtama wrote:
| For the time scale, I was working for Nokia in 2003 and this was
| already researched back then.
| ghusbands wrote:
| To avoid the paywall, read it here: https://archive.is/NoJ1F
| squarefoot wrote:
| This extension bypasses it effectively.
|
| https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywal...
| Austin_Conlon wrote:
| And for Safari users, the built-in Reader Mode bypasses
| paywalls.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| Firefox has a reader mode also, but sometimes the reader
| icon doesn't appear. I'm not sure if this is based on some
| kind of "no reader mode" preference from the site, or
| something else.
|
| If you are not offered reader mode, you can force it by
| prefixing the url with "about:reader?url="
| zapdrive wrote:
| What's with news stories without any visuals? It's a story about
| cameras, lenses and pictures without any pictures!
| kossTKR wrote:
| It's honestly absurd. On a slight tangent this reminds me of
| the fact that millions of extreme high quality photos are taken
| each day - but still most news outlets have poor quality
| photos, and very few of them.
|
| Something is clearly not working licensing wise.
|
| I remember the Boston Globe's "Big Picture" going viral often
| almost 10 years ago on Reddit with amazing high quality photos
| - then they disappeared because Reddit banned them for some
| reason - and it seems few has taken up the idea besides them
| since.
| simias wrote:
| Remember that The Economist is in print, and while they do
| have color the quality of impression and the available space
| is probably not sufficient to get good enough details to
| meaningfully compare the technology.
|
| Besides, it's not Wirecutter, they're reporting on tech, not
| making a buying guide. As such the text is really what
| matters.
|
| I'm a bit surprised by your claim that "something is clearly
| not working" when I have a basically the opposite take:
| images and video take over most of the web's contents. You
| mention reddit, at any given time on the frontpage you'll
| have mostly images and small videos and very little text. And
| of course you have social networks like TikTok and Instagram
| that are _only_ about images.
|
| Given how ultra-comoditized photos and videos have become, it
| makes sense for The Economist to focus on the thing they
| actually do better than any random internet blog or youtube
| review video.
| kossTKR wrote:
| I actually mostly agree with you - our culture is saturated
| with images. Also i appreciate longreads and dense text.
|
| I just don't agree with the comparison to tik-tok or other
| kinds of moving images. To me beautiful high res images,
| well curated and well presented in a layout or standalone
| is still pretty rare to see done well.
|
| It's like the difference between well curated photo
| exhibition and a torrent of commercials, weird formats,
| fast moving images, and sounds / animation / overlays
| instead of simplicity and just letting images speak for
| themselves, slowly or completely without motion.
| heavenlyblue wrote:
| > video take over most of the web's contents
|
| That's only true because ad industry is paying more for
| video content
| dpflan wrote:
| Yes, interesting idea, reminds me of fluid filled glasses -
| https://www.wired.com/2009/02/20-self-adjusta/
|
| Am I missing something? Why isn't there a clear example of the
| lens in action?
|
| Some technology will make this cheap and with enough granular
| control to become a staple lens technology.
| doggodaddo78 wrote:
| Whatever happened to plenoptic cameras like Lytro? Why aren't
| they included in cell phones?
| rahimnathwani wrote:
| Assuming sensor resolution is fixed/limited due cost or size
| constraints, switching to a plenoptic lens will provide an
| image with a much lower resolution.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| Been interested in plenoptic cameras for a while. Here's my
| guess:
|
| 1. Focus after the fact was a nothingburger to consumers.
| Likewise only niche enthusiasm for 3d.
|
| 2. Plenoptic cameras require a lens array or equivalent in the
| optical path. Phones are _extremely_ constrained on depth.
|
| 3. Phone makers realized that if they wanted different focal
| lengths, the most simple route was to put two compact cameras
| on it.
|
| 4. You can't really go below 8x8 pixel "subtiles" with a
| plenoptic lens array. So you're giving up a factor of 64
| resolution at least. That's a heavy cost for features users are
| very apathetic about.
| HWR_14 wrote:
| The Lytro was incredibly long. It was like a small telescope.
| My phone is insanely thin (please make the battery bigger and
| phone fatter). But the optics wouldn't come close to fitting.
|
| The Lytro also had a low resolution. It was fun to click and
| shoot.
| [deleted]
| curmudgeon22 wrote:
| I think this type of advancement is really interesting and would
| be great to see improve and expand. This company in Canada is
| looking at liquid crystal lenses controlled by an electric field,
| I wonder how that compares to the Xiaomi tech?
|
| [1] https://www.scopephotonics.com/technology [2]
| https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/university...
| baybal2 wrote:
| The membrane is a mechanical element.
|
| While LC lenses will no change their shape.
|
| The problem with liquid crystals though is that they are
| birefringent.
|
| The effect look like as if different focal planes have
| different (and quite large) apertures.
|
| I believe this is where the company in questions uses software
| to mask it some way.
|
| The benefit of liquid crystal lenses over other electrically
| tunable lenses is their thickness.
|
| Other tunable lens materials don't have birefringence, but
| their electro/thermo/piezi-optical effect is much, much weaker,
| and large size.
|
| The later is improving with each year. Usable _solid_ TAG
| lenses may get below 1cm.
| PicassoCTs wrote:
| I wonder if the attempt to "replicate" our eyes in this approach
| is not misguided. Why not have a set of small electromagnetic
| wires, a magnetic ferrous-fluid, some distributed optical sensor
| + orientation and allow a NN to manipulate these "optics" until
| it "sees" a reference picture. Given enough training, the optics
| should be able to out-wiggle nearly all traditional optic setups
| without moving parts and expensive lenses.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrofluid_mirror
| baybal2 wrote:
| Laws of physics
|
| The moment you will get a number of wires needed to provide an
| equivalent quality to a lens, you will be better off with a
| lens
|
| Adaptive optics will work if you already have a good wavefront
| to work with, and you can remove more distortions from it with
| AO than you add
| will_walker wrote:
| I worked at a startup that considered liquid lenses from a French
| outfit for optical applications back in the early 2010s. Problems
| with the technology include reliability (not great having fluid
| near electrical components), repeatability, and focus time. It's
| also hard to expect that the lens can easily 'snap' to focus,
| since there will be some play in the polymer / motor drivetrain.
| Mammalian eyes require a complex biological support system to
| keep them functional over years and decades. An unfortunate
| aspect of polymers (like the skin of this lens) is that they do
| not maintain flexibility in the long term.
|
| Perhaps there's been a leap in the technology, but I'd avoid the
| first generation if possible, like I do with all newly
| implemented tech, since I consider the camera a critical function
| of my smartphone.
| baybal2 wrote:
| Changing lens shape is one thing, but it's also possible to
| just directly change the index of refraction of the material
| with any moving parts.
| krick wrote:
| Considering people now tend to change phones every couple of
| years, do you mean by "long term" something even shorter than
| that?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-18 23:01 UTC)